Friday, May 04, 2007

Levicy and Linwood

The lacrosse case suffered from what could be called the “recovered memory” approach to law enforcement. In July, Sgt. Mark Gottlieb produced a “straight-from-memory” report—undated, unsigned, typed—that conveniently filled several holes then existing in Mike Nifong’s case. Yet Gottlieb’s memory-recovery skills paled in comparison to those of Tara Levicy. On January 10, 2007, Levicy managed to remember a variety of critical details about what Crystal Mangum allegedly told her on March 14, 2006, details that hadn’t appeared in the SANE nurse’s report. All these details bolstered the beleaguered position of D.A. Mike Nifong.

Following her June 9 (unmemorialized, apparently by either side) meeting with Nifong and her SANE supervisor, Levicy was eclipsed for several months by other Nifong enablers, chiefly Linwood Wilson and Brian Meehan. Yet as Nifong’s case collapsed following the dismissal of the rape charge on December 22, he and Wilson returned to Levicy for assistance.

On January 10, Wilson and Himan interviewed the SANE nurse—her seventh contact with either the DPD or Nifong’s office since March 16, 2006. At this meeting, Levicy provided three startling new details, each of which propped up Nifong’s new theory of the crime, conformed to her stated view that she had never encountered a woman who lied about being raped, and had passed unmentioned in her March 14 report. In a subsequent interview with defense attorneys, Levicy said that Wilson’s memorandum summarizing her comments “looks right.”

1.) In her report from the night of the “attack,” Levicy wrote that Mangum said no condoms were used. But on January 10, according to Wilson, “Ms. Levicy stated she asked if condoms were used and Ms. Mangum said ‘no’ but wasn’t really sure. Ms. Levicy stated that it was her opinion as a [sexual assault nurse examiner] that ‘victims can never be sure if condoms are used because if they can’t see them how would they know for sure. You can’t feel them so you have to realize there is always a possibility that a condom could have been used.’”

In follow-up questioning from defense attorney Doug Kingsbery, Levicy claimed that she didn’t tell Wilson a new story. Her March 14 report, she said, had indicated that Mangum wasn’t sure whether condoms were used. Yet while the report said that Mangum was uncertain about whether ejaculation occurred, it stated that Mangum thrice had said that the assailants did not use condoms.

Presented with a hard copy of the report showing that Mangum was uncertain about ejaculation, not condom use, Levicy simply modified her story. Rather than admit she was wrong, she now asserted that Mangum had “hesitated” when asked about condom use—even though she had never noted this hesitation in her March 14 report.

At the Liestoppers forum, defense attorney Jim Cooney noted that Levicy’s sudden uncertainty about the use of condoms “was not for purposes of continuing the case”—since, by this point, Nifong was already on his way out—but instead because Nifong was “attempting to put together a defense for his ‘condom’ comments in the Bar’s complaint, and wanted to bolster it with Levicy. She obliged without apparently reviewing her own documents carefully.”

2.) Seeking to explain the lack of DNA evidence, Levicy offered an item more appropriate for the kind of papers she might have submitted as a women’s studies major at the University of Maine than to a medical exam: “I wasn’t surprised when I heard no DNA was found because rape is not about passion or ejaculation but about power.” Examination of a rape victim, she subsequently explained, often failed to reveal the existence of semen, and hence it came as little surprise that Meehan’s tests showed no DNA matches to lacrosse players.

Remarkably, this SANE nurse at one of North Carolina’s leading hospitals appeared not to understand the nature of DNA testing. When it was pointed out to her that testing could reveal DNA from even a single cell, didn’t require the presence of semen, and even could pick up microscopic contamination from Dr. Meehan—and that these tests showed no matches to any lacrosse player—Levicy confessed to being “surprised.” But she didn’t budge in her belief that a rape occurred. The wonders, evidently, of wholly subjective criteria.

(Joe Neff has reported that Levicy wrote back to the DA’s investigator a few days after her meeting—Nifong, it’s worth recalling, was out of the case only two days after her interview with Wilson, meaning that unbiased eyes would scrutinize her work for the first time—to offer additional reasons why no semen was found, including the possibility that no attack occurred.)

3.) In her interview with Wilson, Levicy, for the first time, claimed that Mangum told her on March 14, 2006 that she knew her attackers were using first-name aliases. In a subsequent interview, Kingsbery pointed out that Levicy’s March 14 report had contained no mention of this claim—nor had Mangum made such a claim in her March 16, 2006 interview with police. Indeed, the police conducted their March 16 photo lineups using players named “Matt,” “Adam,” and “Brett” as the prime suspects.

Levicy’s only response to this observation? “Oh.”

She did deny, however, that her new “knowledge” came from media sources—since, she told defense attorneys, she had deliberately avoided any press coverage about the case. At another point in the interview, however, she commented that Dan Flannery had made the call to hire the strippers. Kingsbery then asked her how she knew Flannery’s name, since he gave the name Dan Flannigan to the stripper agency. That must have come from having read newspaper articles about the case, Levicy replied.

I guess she did read the press coverage after all.

Levicy has never explained how her memory suddenly improved nearly ten months after her examination of Mangum; she, along with Theresa Arico, declined two requests for comment about this post and a third offer to post their entire reply, unedited. The day after I contacted her, Levicy’s e-mail address and phone numbers disappeared from the Duke website.

---------

As defense attorneys critiqued Levicy’s performance, they could rely on more than the yawning gaps between her report and her later versions of events. The person that Levicy herself told Doug Kingsbery was the leading authority on rape treatment in the country—Dr. Ann Burgess—was a defense expert for the case.

Burgess’ roots in treating rape victims dated back to 1972, when she co-founded a victims’ program at BostonCityHospital. The author of ten books on assessing and treating sexual assault victims and serial offenders, she chaired the National Research Council’s Task Force on Violence Against Women and received numerous awards, including the Episteme Award (known as “Nursing’s Nobel.”) Burgess, who has served as a consultant to the FBI on sex crimes issues, taught forensic science at Penn before moving to her current position at BostonCollege. Burgess’ opinions were invaluable to defense attorneys as they critiqued Levicy’s performance.

If, then, a trial had occurred, Levicy would faced a difficult time. Yet any shortcomings in Levicy’s testimony would have been almost immaterial to Nifong. As Jim Coleman recently pointed out, it increasingly appears that in his final months running the case, Nifong’s chief goal was somehow to get to trial, regardless of the verdict.

In that respect, Levicy was of critical assistance. Her statements to police allowed Nifong to mask his false assertions about the “crime” in the cloak of medical evidence, while her willingness to alter her story in ways that always seemed to aid the D.A.’s case gave Nifong at least one witness on whom he could absolutely rely—not an easy task in a case where the accuser tended to dramatically change her story every time she spoke to law enforcement.

Ms. Levicy’s actions were unconscionable, unprofessional and the inherent sign of an incredibly biased person and nurse. She alone, is responsible for the start of this witch hunt in my opinion. By not telling the actual facts, by misrepresenting to the police the signs and symptoms of a rape victim, by “embroidering” the true patient findings and historical story, by her sheer ignorance of appropriate forensic evidence collection technique, her sheer ignorance of basic pathophysiology, her sheer ignorance of general medical conditions and the identification of those conditions and by her glaring egotistical need to portray herself as an expert, she sent the police down the trail of deception. Combine that with a rogue prosecutor and shoddy police work (didn’t they read the stupid medical reports for themselves?) she almost put three innocent men in jail.

According to the Duke website as of Monday, Tara Levicy remains in the employ of DukeUniversityMedicalCenter, as a fully certified SANE nurse.

185 comments:

Anonymous
said...

I wonder why Officer Reid followed Himan and Gottleib to Crystal's home on March 16th. Was that standard DPD policy? Or was it a special situation? I wonder if, after talking to Levicy, Himan expected to photograph a lot of injuries other than internal ones. I also wonder whether Crystal was expected to show private areas to Reid, and made up pain stories just to evade that part of the photo session.

Good post. As far as I am concerned, Tara Levicy took part in a criminal conspiracy to frame three innocent people. Furthermore, her supervisor did nothing to set the record straight in the secret meeting with Nifong. Thus, she was a part of the scheme.

We have an employee and a supervisor of Duke University Medical Center entering into a conspiracy with a rogue prosecutor, and they still are employed today as though nothing ever happened. This is stunning, and truly evil. If Levicy gets away with this unscathed -- and it seems that DUMC does not care -- then there really is no justice at all.

Can we do away with this poor nurse now and go on to the big game? I find Kerta comments unprofessional and biased. Her comments about another staff nurse are beyond words.

May 4, 2007 12:10:00 AM

This "poor nurse" engaged in a criminal conspiracy to frame three innocent people. By the way, it is "Kethra," not "Kerta." And if you are enabling a criminal, then all I can say is that your post is "beyond words."

As an emergency physician and Duke grad I plan on writing to the director of emergency services at DUMC.

To "anonymous 12:10 AM": This "poor nurse" is as much "biggame" as Nifong. Without her agenda driven support, misrepresentation, and malicious inexperience this case would have curled up and died last spring.

Parties with significant co-liability in the coming law suits are: DUMC, Levicy, City of Durham, DPD, the State of North Carolina, and Nifong.

By the way, this notion that a nurse always should be beyond criticism is just pathetic. I don't know of any profession that is above criticism, yet we are hearing that no one has a right to criticize Tara Levicy.

Well, I for one am not criticizing her. I am condemning her for what she did, and what she did was evil. This was not simply a case of bad judgment; it was an attempt to help a prosecutor and the police put together a cold-blooded frame.

Add Levicy to the lawsuits. She doesn't deserve to have an RN title. It's ridiculous. She has to be made into an example that people in that profession can't behave that way. Time to raise the standards for the people we put in these professional positions, folks.

Levicy's defenders seem unable to understand the terrible damage she did, and did repeatedly. To them she's just a "poor, picked on nurse".

They just don't get it, yet it's all so simple:

1. Rape is a terrible crime. 2. Falsely accusing anyone of such a terrible crime is itself a form of rape.3. Enabling a false accuser and a rogue DA to continue in their damnable lies about a rape is itself a form of rape.4. All rapists should go to prison.

DUMC SANE Unit must be investigated. Her almost laughable lack of knowledge of what DNA is shocking. She believes DNA is Semen!! If there wasn't any ejaculation there wouldn't be any DNA? This woman is a Nurse, a SANE Nurse?? A trained SANE Nurse at Duke?? You have to be kidding me!!

There is a well known datum in nusring, if it isn't charted it isn't true. This woman is incompetent to serve as a Nurse & should be immediately suspended.

Bill Anderson: That makes no sense at all, I agree, to be unable to criticize a nurse. If anything, they should be held to even higher standards. (I wonder if those same people think we can't criticize the nurses who turned out be serial killers, like Genene Jones and others).

Nope we can’t do away with her since it isn’t a capital crime. I was willing to give the Nurse some slack since she was a rookie but the errors she made always helped Nifong. Honest errors would have gone both ways. Her errors were agenda driven.

You can’t have agenda driven Sane Nurses. If you can’t see the danger of that based on the facts of this case then I guess you will just have to wallow in ignorance.

I hope there is a large lawsuit so in the future Hospitals will only hire non-agenda driven Sane nurses.

Professor Johnson is correct to continue to focus attention on the role of the nurse. This is a criminal conspiracy that requires investigation by the North Carolina attorney general's office and the SBI. What about it, Mr. Cooper?

Again, we see the results of the "women never lie about rape" section of the True Believers of victim advocacy. I dealt with this cult during my last ten years as a prosecutor, and found them unreasonable, prejudiced, and willing to believe anything told them by a "victim". While the police and prosecutors were attempting to get to some understanding of the actual truth of an incident, the T.B.'s were agitating for immediate filing, for severe penalties, and for prosecution without making the "victim" testify! This group was politically active and well-entrenched in the liberal, feminist section of the electorate. You've never lived until you've faced a screaming group of TB's in your office, and you're the one telling them, "But I can't prosecute with this ridiculous story that has no facts to back it up! The defendant has rights!" The outgrowth of the SANE program from this world of victim advocacy brings this prejudiced, adversarial attitude into the scientific exam. A good prosecutor should learn from this case, and be very, very careful about the SANE reports received!

Wouldn't it be great if KC could get Ann Burgess, according to Levicy herself the "leading authority on rape treatment in the country," to evaluate the merit of the eagerly anticipated defense of Levicy from DK's wife?

She did deny, however, that her new “knowledge” came from media sources—since, she told defense attorneys, she had deliberately avoided any press coverage about the case. At another point in the interview, however, she commented that Dan Flannery had made the call to hire the strippers. Kingsbery then asked her how she knew Flannery’s name, since he gave the name Dan Flannigan to the stripper agency. That must have come from having read newspaper articles about the case, Levicy replied.

I guess she did read the press coverage after all.

Levicy has never explained how her memory suddenly improved nearly ten months after her examination of Mangum; she, along with Theresa Arico, declined two requests for comment about this post and a third offer to post their entire reply, unedited.

The trouble for liars is they forget all the details that they put in to the first lie, and then have to lie more to cover it up. Tara, the expert wilderness instructor, Vagina Monologue producer, massage therapy practitioner, Women's Studies major bachelorette turned into quickie RN, SANE thought she was the smartest person in the room when she talked with the defense attorneys. She rightly deserves any scorn that is heaped upon her, as she did not care one whit about any scorn that the falsely accused endured. Maybe this will cause Tara to act with more caution and less bravado as AG Cooper put it.

This Nurse is Dangerous. She is making statements that are not charted. That is a huge No No. Ask any Nurse & they will tell you that. It is so ridiculous because Nurses are drilled to chart & record and this Nurse is changing her version months later? Huh?? That is drilled into you in Nursing School.

This is really scary. I would say in the vast majority of Teaching Hospitals she would be dismissed if caught changing versions that are not charted.

DUMC SANE Unit must be investigated. Her almost laughable lack of knowledge of what DNA is shocking. She believes DNA is Semen!! If there wasn't any ejaculation there wouldn't be any DNA? This woman is a Nurse, a SANE Nurse?? A trained SANE Nurse at Duke?? You have to be kidding me!!

This lack of knowledge is why I find it difficult to understand why a Women's Study Bachelor(ette) degree is good enough to put someone on a fast track to an RN. Are we to expect that she took a bunch of real science courses in that 15 month period, in order to catch up with her peers? What a complete waste!

When it was pointed out to her that testing could reveal DNA from even a single cell, didn’t require the presence of semen, and even could pick up microscopic contamination from Dr. Meehan—and that these tests showed no matches to any lacrosse player—Levicy confessed to being “surprised.” But she didn’t budge in her belief that a rape occurred. The wonders, evidently, of wholly subjective criteria.

It sounds a lot like what you can read from the Amanda Marcotte fans at http://pandagon.net/2007/05/01/get-a-life-kids/ 2007. You'll believe these people are posting from May 1, 2006 or earlier.

To think that Duke Hospital and its high powered lawyers are dumb defies credibility.

Who would have ever thought that Duke Hospital would be dumb enough to not only hire Tara Levicy, but to keep her on as this moved forward?!! DUMC has completely lost whatever credibility or great reputation they once had, as a direct result of the way they handled their personnel in this case.

A little slimmer pickings than KC's past dynamite posts. But quite a job uncovering matters relating to Levicy and DUMC in past KC threads. So kudos, to Professor Johnson for past significant uncoveries.

I am struck by a peculiar American idiocy that seeks to personalize and affix all blame in a clusterf**k on a single individual.

The logic goes: If ONLY Mao had been brought to justice, everythink will be OK and communism ended. If ONLY we could "get bin Laden" we win, we win! - and all Islamic terrorism ends..Anything else, like uncovering Islamoids in America or Iraq out to blow things up - is only a "distraction" from getting the Mr Evil or Big Cheese behind it all.

Now, that is how it is in Hollywood, but not in reality, where a Nifong or Levicy exists only in context of systemic failures.

Arguing that we must ignore Levicy (and Arico and many more in the DUMC), the Group of 88, Crystal the whore, Gottlieb so as to better focus on the Single Evildoer Mastermind Behind It All - Nifong - is flat-out stupid...

The gunning for specific, lone individuals while ignoring systemic issues stemming from culture, law, PC in matters where dozens or more know of or participate in evil is the gunning antics of idiots.

The proper question is given rules, laws and expectations - who knew what when - and why did they fail to stop it, and who behaved badly from calculation or ignorance based on cultural beliefs or exortations of ignorant mobs? Who? Who as in the sum of individuals or groups is at fault, and how to they get fixed, or punished hard enough to deter others.

Beware of people that say "It's all about bin Laden!" "All focus must be on Nifong, forget the enablers or root causes!" even saying "The archevildoer nurse was the sole person behind it!!"They are morons.

"This lack of knowledge is why I find it difficult to understand why a Women's Study Bachelor(ette) degree is good enough to put someone on a fast track to an RN. Are we to expect that she took a bunch of real science courses in that 15 month period, in order to catch up with her peers? What a complete waste!"

The bachelor(ette) is in Nursing, not Women's Studies; as evidenced by the fact that it took only 15 months to complete the program. Presumably Levicy spent at least 4 years earning her Women's Studies degree.

Building on anon 12:22am's comment on the miserable conduct of actors in positions of great trust:

We all know the faults that people are prone to. Just look around, or glance at the mirror. In a society that values concepts like 'autonomy' and 'justice,' we don't rely on the perfectibility of human nature. Instead, we try to build and modify institutions so that people have a good chance to be treated with fairness and respect.

Properly-functioning institutions are sensitive to warranted criticism from outside. They have mechanisms for audits. They exhibit an ability to reform and to self-correct.

Some of the institutions that played important parts in the first few months of the hoax: The Durham Police DepartmentDuke University Medical CenterDurham CrimeStoppersThe News & ObserverThe Herald-SunThe New York TimesThe Duke FacultyDuke's AdministrationDurham City GovernmentThe State's Attorney for Durham's officeThe North Carolina JudiciaryDurham's left-wing communityDurham's religious communityThe NC-NAACP

At one remove, the Duke University and DUMC Boards of Trustees, and accreditation agencies for hospitals, police departments, and forensic laboratories could be added to the list.

Which of these institutions has demonstrated that it is capable of(1) recognizing major mistakes, (2) acknowledging those errors, and (3) initiating corrective procedures?

None of them.

The hoax and the aftermath of the hoax is a story of the absence of institutional accountability.

Tara Levicy is shown to be an inexperienced apprentice SANE who was unsuited by training, ideology, and temperament to handle forensic evidence-gathering and reporting as it pertains to rape.

Yet, somehow, her supervisors--Theresa Arico and Julie Manly--allowed Levicy to thrust herself into a position of prominence.

Somehow, Levicy's "expert" findings quickly became common knowledge in the DUMC gossip circuit, in direct violation of HIPAA.

Somehow, Levicy became DUMC's point person in dealing with the DPD and the DA's office. Somehow, she maintained this position even after this case exploded into national prominence.

One key test of an institution is how its leadership performs after a failure. It's human nature to heed the voice within that whispers, "double down." But it's painful to obey The First Rule of Holes ("When you're in one, stop digging").

Levicy isn't the problem. Arico isn't the problem. It was DUMC supervisors and policies that enabled these fallible ideologues to take the institution's helm and steer the ship in their chosen direction.

In my opinion, most of the eager talk of lawsuits in these threads doesn't stem from schadenfreude, or even from a belief that money will suitably recompense the injured.

Instead, it is a despairing response to a fundamentally correct social-engineering analysis.

In the year since the storm broke, the poorly-performing institutions at the heart of the hoax have shown no signs of recognizing the nature of their failures. They show no signs of engaging in self-correction.

And, all the more reason why a seasoned prosecutor like Nifong would never have taken Levicy as his expert witness without more investigation and corroboration when a physician had conducted the exam and gathered the evidence for the rape kit.

At best Levicy was just hoping to become the next Kato Kailin on court tv, at worst she was maliciously attacking 3 innocent individuals. Regardless of what her motive was, Levicy has disgraced, Duke, DUMC, the SANE occupation, real victims of rape and the legal system. Levicy should absolutely be fully investigated, stripped of her nursing certification and included in civil litigation. I think Tara would be wise to lawyer up right about now.

I wonder if Duke will pay her legal bills for her? After all, Duke is probably paying the legal bills of Kim Curtis and the state is likely paying the legal bills of Nifong....for now at least.

I am suddenly curious about a possible link between T. Levicy and Nifongs feminazi wife. Maybe they knew each other; they seem to share a lot of interests. On another topic; it looks to me like that this case is going to do a lot of damage to the whole notion of having SANE programs. The one at Duke has more or less admitted that their role is to help convict more men, not help the criminal justice system do a better job with rape cases. I realize that those sort of folks cannot grasp the difference but some people can and they will for sure begin to see SANE programs as a threat to justice.

Best post of the triology so far. It clearly shows Levicy's devotion to extending the frameup was as great as Gottlieb's or Wilson's or Nifongs. Her attempts to rewrite the exam story in light of new facts is eerily reminiscent of Crystal's new timeline revelations from the Dec 21 interview with Linwood.

She's clearly moved from exhibiting bias, self aggandizing behavior, incompetancies displayed in the first two posts to criminal conspiracy and obstruction of justice.

It is not a scorecard and that is a terrible way to look at it because to destroys all objectivity and the truth is never found. "US v Them" mentalities don't don't do anyone any good.

I just wanted to post quicky to say that now that the 3rd part of the story has been completed my wife will soon submit her essay to AMac. The timing of this is dependent on how quickly she can get it peer reviewed.

I will not post again until my wife submits and until AMac verifies her credentials, unless there is some odd pressing reason for me to do so.

“I wasn’t surprised when I heard no DNA was found because rape is not about passion or ejaculation but about power.”

This comment by Levicy is perhaps the single most telling of them all in my opinion. Her role is suppose to be as a medical expert of physical evidence, yet here she injects psychological principals and theory's as if she was playing the board game CLUE. Even if Tara Levicy made the above statement about a victim that had actually been raped where a vast amount of physical evidence was present, the comment is still out of line.

I was using the score as an analogy of how KC is making point after point that seem impossible for anyone to challenge based on his research and knowledge of the case and the fact that you and your "wife" continue to slam what he is saying with out backing it up.

If your "wife" really is a SANE and she can not see the obvious role Tara played in this frame-up, I wonder how many innocent men she has assisted in being sent off to jail.

She knew her limitations well enough to ask a physician to conduct the pelvic exam and gather the rape kit evidence, Therefore, she also surely knew she was NOT an expert and NOT to portray herself as one. She not only signed the report as the examining professional, but presented herself as an expert with subjective evidence alone.

She was filled with pride and puffery. Her committment to feminism was coming to fruition. She was going to make a difference in her quest for a world of fresh, untouched-by-man vaginas!

Levicy also has every symptom of not being too bright beyond the feminist mantra she seemed quite at-home with in her words on various causes (found via Google). Not just the liars syndrome of getting caught in lies, but not well-educated in her scientific field, either. My bet is that her 15 month nursing course was the same as the GED experience, i.e. a course on how to pass the test.

She has no business being a nurse where the call is to care for the sick, injured, and dying, much less a SANE if she would lie to get men convicted of rape to satisfy both her ego and her agenda. The cronyism that prevents her peers from criticizing her on the basis of known and documented ACTIONS is the same that allowed Nifong to strip three innocent men and their families of their education, their sport, their money, their reputations, and their honor.

Make your complaints to the NC Board of Nursing. This cannot go unpunished.

Then, await the onslaught of civil trials, coming to a courtroom near you, soon!

To DK For the best possible peer review of your sanenursewifes upcoming response, you should have her submit it to Dr. Ann Burgess - who afterall was mentioned by Nurse Levicy as the best single authority on the right way to do SANE nursing. Why are you hestitating? I see fear and confusion in your eyes. Could that be because Dr. Burgess has been an invaluable resource to the defense in helping them see exactly how bad Levicys actions have been? You realize, of course, that if you convince people that your wife found a couple of other SANE nurses to agree that Levicy did what she was supposed to do all that you will accomplish is the further destruction of any remaining legitimacy attached to the way SANE nursing is currently carried out. Levicy acted in a criminal fashion here and so now you are going to say that SANE nurses are supposed to do criminal things? Whatever, Dude.

"I just wanted to post quicky to say that now that the 3rd part of the story has been completed my wife will soon submit her essay to AMac. The timing of this is dependent on how quickly she can get it peer reviewed."

Ahhh...sure.

Another stalling tactic. If your wife is so certain of her opinions as you've indicated all week she should just state it and not hide behind "peer review." After all, you've posited that she's an expert.

Kethra, who you criticized, has stated her opinion without "peer review."

Anonymous @1:08:00 AM says:The bachelor(ette) is in Nursing, not Women's Studies; as evidenced by the fact that it took only 15 months to complete the program. Presumably Levicy spent at least 4 years earning her Women's Studies degree.

Perhaps I misunderstood Ms. Levicy's own words on the Wilderness Medical Associates Staff website. I thought when she referred to her "bachelorette" program, that she made mention of her time at Univ. of Maine, where she got her Women's Studies degree. She got her nursing at Univ. of Southern Maine.

Tara Levicy WEMT,RN,SANE An emergency department nurse in the Durham/Raleigh area in NC currently. Maine is still my home and where I grew up. For over ten years I worked as a whitewater rafting guide in Maine, lead outdoor programs for the University of Maine where I completed a concentration in outdoor education while in my bachelorette program. While in NC, I enjoy spending my off time cycling, canoeing, hiking and reading.

Most readers come here for insight. Surely, there is a diversity of opinion in the SANE community. It seems that Mrs. DK has a hitherto-unheard viewpoint. If she is, as you say, a practicing SANE RN--and at this point, there's little reason to doubt that--her perspective can only add to the discussion.

I'll report on such bona fides as she chooses to offer, while keeping them private, if she wishes. As for my own credibility (fair question), I'm 'known' to KC, John in Carolina, Craig Henry, and the bloggers at www.windsofchange.net, FWIW.

The best short summary of the entire day:5/3 @ 12:42 AM Liestoppers: a suggestion for your fundraising: a LIGHT BLUE armband that says, "In case of emergency take me to UNC."

Chicago said...@ 1:32 AM ... Her [Levicy's] role is suppose to be as a medical expert of physical evidence, yet here she injects psychological principals and theory's as if she was playing the board game CLUE.

cedarford at 1:06 AM said,"The gunning for specific, lone individuals while ignoring systemic issues stemming from culture, law, PC in matters where dozens or more know of or participate in evil is the gunning antics of idiots.... "Beware of people that say ... `All focus must be on Nifong, forget the enablers or root causes!" even saying "The archevildoer nurse was the sole person behind it!!'They are morons. "

anonymous at 1:14 AM said, "It took a lot of people to make this Hoax. It starts with Crystal & moves Levicy, Himan, Gottlieb, and Nifong."

I agree (again) with Cedarford, and want to use a chess analogy for anon1:14:

All those people you named, on the chessboard of this scandal, they are all on the front row. They're pawns. The King of the hoax-enablers is the Duke Board of Trustees; the Queen is President Brodhead; the Bishops are in the faculty; the Knights are the kids brainwashed by the bishops; and, the Rooks are the Duke administrators.

Knock off the pawns, sure, but keep in mind that the goal is to capture the King. Keep your eyes on the prize.

For Mrs. DK's rebuttal of KC Johnson to be effective, it must be a comparison and contrast of the information KC has already revealed, with additional information ABOUT LEVICY or THIS CASE that negates KC's information.

Any other form, i.e. a long diatribe on what the SANE procedures are (which we can all look up and have in many cases...they are at LS), then a compendium on how Levicy did not "really" or "knowingly" or "intentionally" violate any rules, laws or procedures, is worthless. To be of any interest, there must be demonstrated knowledge of this case and the facts of it.

In other words, I won't be reading it unless it responds point for point. Cronyism (called professional courtesy, meaning no professional criticizes another, and most definitely is to always makes excuses for her, too) should not be a part of this work AT ALL.

Anonymous said... I am only interested in the hoax ORIGINATOR NIFONG - the rest can clear or not clear their house as they want.

May 4, 2007 2:32:00 AM

Well, the "hoax originator" was Crystal Gail Mangum. Appears you would want Nifong to "clear" (is that supposed to be clean?) his own house, which I think we have all seen exactly how he does at that task.

And, it's not just Mangum and Nifong. A very LONG list of conspirators (this was not a "hoax" but a cold-blooded frame, accomplished through a conspiracy of willing participants) need to be held accountable.

Anonymous said... i don't think anyone cares if you read it or not - with all your criteria - maybe you should write it yourself.

May 4, 2007 2:46:00 AM

I don't need to write it. I already know the bottom line, as most critically thinking and analytical people do, also. I don't think anyone but Mrs. DK would attempt to write it and what I suspect she would write will just be another diatribe on "poor little nurse" Levicy's inexperience, packed with excuses and metanarratives similar to that written by 88 others we all know, as well as a certain Ca$h person, incapable of acknowledging real facts when they fail to support their agendas.

We should not give a forum for yet another enabler of this conspiracy. I know KC won't.

Has anyone else noticed that all the good comments seem to come right after the main post comes out? After about 12:00 am PST, things start to go South and get progressively worse during the day. West Coast bias?

Tonight not too many Trollers, that act seems to have dried up. Lots of good comments.

Keep up the great work KC. I thought this was some of your finest reporting.

KC, I hope you will deal with this latest attack on the lacrosse players from the media. This story blames the lacrosse team for the drop in applications to Duke. Sample text includes:

Fresh scandal erupted this week with Duke's disclosure that 34 students in its master's of business administration program were disciplined for cheating. The school already was tainted by last year's sexual assault accusations against three lacrosse players. Widespread news coverage reinforced an image of binge drinking, although ultimately all charges against the players were dropped. [Note, not "found innocent", just "charges dropped".]

``When we tell people our daughter is going to Duke, they say, `Keep her away from the lacrosse team,''' said Sheila Walden....

``Both of these incidents [the cheating scandal and the lacrosse team party] happening at an institution as prestigious as Duke is an extra blow,'' said Ferrel Guillory, director of the Program on Public Life at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill....

President Richard Brodhead canceled the remainder of last year's lacrosse season and accepted the resignation of coach Mike Pressler. The allegations stemmed from an off-campus party in March 2006. An exotic dancer said she'd been raped by three players, who she said were drunk and made racial slurs.

what is so remarkabke in this case was the simple known fact to law enforcement that MAGNUM had previously made a similar rape accusation which was FALSE...

it didnt matter what her character was, it didnt matter what she had done before, SHE WAS A NEGROE, SHE HAD UNEQUAL PROTECTION, SHE WAS SUPPORTED BY BOTH THE RACE FINANCE INDUSTRY LEF BY THE NAACP AND THE JUSTICE BROTHER(jesse jackson and alsharpass) and MOST IMPORTANTLY SHE WAS BELIEVED BY THE DUKE PRESIDENT, THE DUKE FACULTY AND 100% of the non american anti america foreign students who studies at duke

there are dangers when non americans are encouraged by an out of control faculty to create a media and vigilante riot before the facts are known

Amac's 1:08 A. M. post is one of the best I've read in months. I shall be sending it to a friend of mine from my graduate-school days (more than thirty years ago) who now sits on the Duke Board of Trustees. In private correspondence, this friend wrote the following:

"Attached please find a copy of Bob Steel's letter on behalf of the Board of Trustees. Bob Steel does in fact represent the views of the Board in supporting President Brodhead's handling of this very difficult matter. I have watched his even and steady leadership under the most intense pressure and share the views expressed in the letter wholeheartedly. There are lots of folks out there who have views on this matter and there no doubt will be ongoing critique, but I can tell you that the Board of Trustees of Duke University is one of the few entities that did not rush to judgment in this matter. That fact may pain some who thought we should take matters into our own hands, but a University does not possess the ability, nor certainly the authority, to conduct independent investigations of matters that are under criminal indictment. This has been a sorry episode for the justice system, but Duke was not responsible for that fact. The University has also suffered while waiting for this matter to be resolved."

Amac's general argument is compelling: Bad things "happen" to organizations all the time. What distinguishes one outfit from another is how it responds to the wheel of fortune.

Here is DIW all time favorite Wendy Murphy explaining how DNA isn't important.

Dear colleagues;

This is an important case — rape of a 12 year old child, reportedly immediately, rape kit done right away. Defendant argued on appeal the evidence was insufficient because no DNA was found during the rape kit and the child’s hymen was in tact.

The defendant confessed to committing the act of penile/vaginal penetration - the victm’s blood and defendant’s semen were found at the crime scene — and there was other corroboration of some of the collateral details —

This is an important case as it emphasizes that rape does not necessarily produce DNA (contrary to the claims of defense supporters in the Duke case) — nor does it cause hymenal tearing — (contrary to the claims of many defense voices in lots of child rape cases).

Wendy Murphy, Esq.

That was from 1/27/07 on a blog called sadly normal.

I conclude that Murphy feels her feminist audience doesn't posse the intelligence to realize that blood and semen contain DNA. I think the infantile gullibilty of Murphy's audience is worse than her complete lack of morals.

Just a little off today's exact subject but something that just occurred to me that I would like to share with you.

After having been in law enforcement for over two decades and involved in the criminal justice system for longer than that in another state, every rape victim that I encountered was subdued, acted ashamed, withdrawn etc. Every victim but one, that is. The one victim acted with screams, hysterical for a protracted time, turning it on and off. A senior investigator sarcastically commented, "This is no rape, it's a theft of services." I was appalled at his insensitivity until the facts of the case came out. She was a prostitute in a near by city who had agreed to go in a car and have sex for money. Rather than pay her, when she had exited the car to relieve herself, the john just left, dumping her out in the country without her clothing. So she went to a house, banged on the door and claimed rape. An interesting parallel in many ways.

Has anyone noticed the FBI is already investigating the LAPD over the cops' reaction to the Mayday demos? I guess if the three Lacrosse players had been named Martinez, Valdez, and Ramirez we'd be hearing about a massive Department of Justice inquiry into Nifong's hoax. Are civil rights only valid if you're a racial minority group member??

There is no doubt that Nifong will use Levicy and Arico as his "beards" in his upcomming disciplinary hearing. He will argue, with some justification, that he would have been lynched by the potbangers, race baiters and Duke faculity if he discounted the SANE "evidence".

SANE nurses should be outraged by these bad apples who pose as neutral experts while pushing their agenda. If I am on a jury, I will be much more skeptical of any SANE nurse testimony.

The real victims of Levicy and Arico are the true rape survivors who will have a more difficult time convincing a jury of their legitimate stories.

DUMC should be ashamed that it did not correct the record when it became aware of Levicy's antics.

Leave Massage Therapists out of it!There are flakes in our particularbowl of Wheaties (but most of usare crumbs?) - but most of us aredecent, hard working people.And we also - mostly - abide byprofessional standards.

Levicy obviously doesn't evenabide by standards that a Massage Student might be taught,especially with regard to documentation.

KC - Excellent posts about Levicy's role and actions. A different title might be: When Ideology trumps Evidence. The saddest part of this is that there are thousands of "Levicy's " across the country who are allowing their ideology to impact their professional judgement. The spawning ground for this is women's studies. Something must be done.

People who despise Tara Levicy after the revelations of the past few days should prepare themselves for this likelihood: that she is worse than you presently think. How?

Well, the working narrative of how this case metastasized is that the DPD investigators took rather mild description of injury on March 16th (as described in the search warrant for 610) and ramped it up later in order to secure a warrant for the DNA NTO. But that is likely 180 degrees opposite of what really occurred. That it was Levicy - and not DPD - who was the aggressive driving force right out of the gate on the 16th.

Consider this. Investigator Himan first called Levicy before visiting Crystal Mangum at her residence. Afterwards, along with Gottleib, Himan took Officer Reid to photograph Crystal's injuries. But ask yourself, why was Reid even taken at all? Supposedly, the SANE program is a coordinated effort among hospital, police, investigative, and prosecutorial staffs. That working arrangement delegates the primary rape data-gathering to the SANE unit at the hospital, along with any first responders who help or witness later. That means that the SANE nurse procures biological samples and documents injuries to the patient in real time, in addition to recording witness testimony as it occurs.

So why was Reid brought along to produce a seemingly duplicate effort regarding photographs? Two full days later? (It wasn't like it was intended to be completely duplicative, inasmuch that Gottleib didn't have a colposcope in his pocket to roam around internally.)

The only conclusion one can draw is that Himan brought Reid along expecting to see external injuries that someone previously described to him; that a person on the scene at the hospital described to him. Since it's doubtful that either Shelton or Sutton made such observations, we are left with the obvious: Tara Levicy.

Did she tell Himan to look for bruising that she expected would materialize during the two days after she imagined injuries (and which Crystal's body didn't display on the 14th)? That in addition to internal distress, that Crystal was banged up, but not to the point that a camera in the SANE unit could capture it? What other explanation is there?

What we know is this: that after visiting Crystal, DPD investigators produced a search warrant that didn't mention blunt force trauma, only a vanilla "consistent" phrasing. They had willingly photographed Crystal's complete lack of external injuries, and evidently weren't yet ready to include the delusions of a SANE nurse in their official documents.

So after they saw with their own eyes that Crystal was nearly pristine externally, where did the "blunt force" language eventually come from? Did the police confront Levicy with their findings on the 21st? And did she helpfully modify her earliest diagnosis on the spot - restricting it to internal blunt force injuries - in order to keep the train rolling down the tracks?

"the Board of Trustees of Duke University is one of the few entities that did not rush to judgment in this matter"

Nor did they personally attack the Washington Monument with little rubber mallets. What they did do, however, and continue to do, is ...nothing. By endorsing Brodhead's "handling" of the situation they have joined the ranks of enablers.

Duke's reputation has suffered, faculty members have acted in egregious ways and been rewarded, student rights have been violated, medical staff have demonstrated feminist-agenda-driven incompetence (at best), and apparently this is all just peachy with the Trustees.

What, I wonder, would have to occur for the lethargic Trustees to put forth some carefully worded evidence of displeasure? One also has to wonder how permeated with radical liberalism the Trustees themselves are. A few strident objectors to action, or vociferous supporters of Brodhead and the Gang of 88, would likely be enough to block any appropriate response. And of course there is the inclination to avoid liability, or appearance of a mistake in hiring Brodhead.

The end result in all cases is what we see: inaction, endorsement and passive acceptance. Doesn't that equate to "enabling?"

KC, in the book, you're going to have to repeatedly use Dave Barry's line: "I am not making this up". Readers will need to be reminded that it is neither fiction nor satire.

Props to Amac for a couple of excellent posts, especially the one on systemic failures. This is true anywhere: A truly spectacular fustercluck is always a series of 'lesser' transgressions which gets out of control.

SenSATional post on institutional accountability. The list of institutions you list (aside from the communities, as they aren't institutions and don't have processes to be reviewed) should all have an independent review of their role in the hoax, with recommendations as to how to improve procedures. Only an independent review will have credibility.

I suspect that, if any of these reviews are or have been taking place, we won't get to see them until they're revealed in discovery processes.

This doesn't get the individuals off the hook, in my view.

My hunch is that, having determined that CGM was faking it, DUMC staff sent in the two inexperienced staff (Levicy and Manly), thinking it would be a good learning experience. Bad move.

1. Levicy writes in her report "no condoms were used"; nearly *9 months* later she thens add, "oh yeah, I forgot to write this in my report, I remember she wasn't sure about that point, she was.... uh... hesitating when she answered that particular question".

2. She explains away the lack of DNA:

- A completely inapropriate political mantra about rape and power.

- Limiting "DNA" to only semen from an ejaculation; completely ignorant that a violent 30 minute gang rape would likely bring about DNA from hair, skin, saliva, etc.

3. 9 months later, she magically remembers that Mangum clearly indicated the offenders were using aliases. Magic, considering Mangum herself hadn't mentioned this point to the police both immediately before or after the rape exam.

"Oh", she says, "I still think a rape occurred".

Let's put this another way, either Levicy is an evil, corrupt, agenda-driven extremist or she is a well-meaning, ethical person who is utterly and completely incompentent at her job.

"Kethra, who you criticized, has stated her opinion without "peer review."

Actually, that's not entirely true. Kethra's post criticizing Levicy's SANE performance has been peer reviewed by several other nurses (including experienced SANE nurse Kathleen Eckelt who runs the website Forensics Talk, as well as other nurses who post on LS). These other nurses have agreed with Kethra that Levicy did an abysmal job -- an opinion that we now find is also apparently shared by Levicy's own patron saint of nursing, Dr. Ann Burgess! Ouch . . . . that's gotta sting.

I'm sorry, but I've had about enough of these mindless Nurse Tara apologists...it's just insulting, and tedious...stupid, stupid people...just STUPID... shut up, already...Nurse Tara has done enough damage, you don't need to add to it...you're as bad as Norm Early, going to bat for MONTHS for an obviously dishonest prosecutor...sfu already, you're really making yourself look foolish (and all for naught, because your Nurse Tara is in trouble, big time)...

After all that, Levicy is not only employed, but has received full SANE certification from the International Association of Forensic Nurses. That story really brings to question the value of their certifications, doesn't it?

) Nursing personnel should be advocates for their patients, but this advocacy should be based on truth and not on lies or an underlying political agenda. While Levicy may have thought she was being a advocate for Crystal, in fact she was enabling Mike Nifong and his false prosecution of a crime which never happened. One might excuse Levicy's mistakes on March 14 due to inexperience, but this explanation does not fly based on her actions in her meeting with Nifong in June and with Wilson and Himan in January. These meetings confirm that Levicy was acting to bolster the prosecution and fill holes in Nifong's story of the "crime." She went from being an advocate for Crystal to being an advocate for Mike Nifong.

2) The people who should be most outraged about Levicy's actions and words should be other nurses. Levicy, by turning over the pelvic exam to Dr. Manly, admitted by her actions that she was not a fully certified SANE who could legally perform such an exam. Yet Levicy apparently felt she was qualified to make a diagnosis of "blunt force trauma" and qualified to act in the role of an "expert witness" in talking to the police on multiple occasions even months after the incident. Levicy went beyond the role of a SANE-in-training and even of an experienced nurse to become, in effect, a member of the prosecution team. This perverts the role of a SANE nurse and is a violation of nursing ethics.

3) Levicy's actions need to be placed in context to what else was happening in the case. Levicy's false assertions in her first conversations with Himan provided much of the basis for the request for the NTO order in March. By June 9, when she met with Nifong, it was clear that Nifong had very little upon which to base a case-- the DNA was negative, Crystal's credibility was eroding due to revelations about her past, and doubts were increasing about the photoID lineup. Levicy propped up a weak case by providing a rationale for Nifong to continue. By January, even Nifong knew the case was lost; he was pressing ahead to a trial presumably with hopes of a hung jury and to increase his pension by added months of "service." Yet even in January Levicy was trying to explain away the lack of DNA and the condom issue.

Tara Levicy was not a bit-player in this drama. She provided the basis for the early assertions of rape and guilt made in the prosecution's requests for search warrants and for DNA samples and photographs from the 46 lacrosse players, and in Nifong's public comments. As the case collapsed. Levicy continued to provide support for a charge of rape. She was the basis for the false prosecution claim that there was evidence consistent with a sexual assault. As the Special Prosecutor's report noted, this conclusion was not based on results of the physical exam but on a subjective assesment by Levicy of Crystal's behavior. Levicy went beyond the scope of her training and experience to help initiate the rape charges and then tried to prop up the charges as the case faltered.

The evidence shows serious violations of professional ethics by Levicy, if not possible criminal acts, such as conspiracy, as well.

Those who want to leave the nurse alone miss the point. If the nurse had followed procedure and made mistakes, i would agree. The whole point of proper procedure (writing things down, being honest etc.) is to allow the system to identify and correct mistakes. It also removes, to the extent possible, personal bias. So, if you are required to write down facts, and all the facts, what you subjectively think or feel becomes less important. If you ignore procedure, intentionally ignore procedure, in order to pursue your agenda, you should be held accountable. A prosecutor can be a super liberal, or a hardcore conservative, a nurse could be a rush limbaugh devotee or Obama's biggest fan, but their handling of an alleged rape victim should not turn on their politics.

So, put aside the pity party. Also put it aside because she is a thirty year old professional who did in fact mistakes. The victims, the former defendants, are college students who are innocent. Everybody (well not everybody but the remnants of the enablers) wants to blame them for their alleged wrongdoing and errors of judgment and write off the suffering of their families, the team, the former coach and the university. Well, guess what. They are younger and less culpable than this grown up nurse.

If she, and Nifong, and the DPD had followed procedures (regardless of ideology) none of the trauma to dozens of people, and the disruption to many more, would have happened. If they had followed procedure any mistake by one of them would have been caught.

I don't thinkshe should go to jail, or be stopped from kayaking the Maine woods. I do think she should be held accountable professionally and perhaps financially.

There is a difference in "defending" Levicy and NOT agreeing that she bears substantial responsibility for the hoax or that she should be sued or that her unprofessionalism opens up Duke Medical to a legitimate lawsuit.

Nifong is on record as saying that as long as Mangum said she was raped and identified her alleged attackers he was taking the case to trial. It sounds to me like if Levicy had kept her mouth shut, it wouldn't have made a difference. Without the 'blunt force trauma' he would have simpy said that injuries don't usually occur in rape cases and he was doing it the old fashioned way, with a witness, just like what he said when no DNA was found.

It's 100% clear Levicy is biased, even for a SANE nurse and that she went far, far, far out of her way to prop up a losing case. This makes her unworthy to be a SANE and a liability to real rape victims, it doesn't make her a criminal, doesn't constitute medical malpractice, how ridiculous, and most likely doesnt' form the basis of any cause of action against Duke Medical.

You are completely wrong. The acts Levicy was involved in leave DUMC wide open for serious civil litigation. While the criminal aspects of her action are debatable, there is a wide open door for civil suits.

The International Association of Forensic expects its members to adhere to the highest standards of ethics. Forensic nurses have professional obligations to colleagues, to science, and to the public, and especially to those members of the public who are demonstrably disadvantaged.

Accordingly, the International Association of Forensic Nurses expects its members and associate members to abide by its Code of Ethics as a condition of initial and continued membership.

CODE OF ETHICS

RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PUBLIC AND THE ENVIRONMENT:Forensic nurses have a professional responsibility to serve the public welfare, especially its most disadvantaged citizens, and to further the cause of science and justice. Forensic nurses should be actively concerned with the health and welfare of the community at large. Forensic nurses must understand and anticipate the environmental consequences of their work on the work of others in their communities. Forensic nurses must be prepared to stand up and oppose environmental pollution and other environmental degradation. Public comments on scientific matters should be made with care and precision, devoid of unsubstantiated claims, exaggeration, and/or premature statements.

OBLIGATION TO SCIENCEForensic nurses should seek to advance nursing and forensic science, understand the limits of their knowledge, and respect the truth. Forensic nurses should ensure that their scientific contributions, and those of their collaborators are thorough, accurate, and unbiased in design, operationalization, and presentation.

CARE OF THE PROFESSIONForensic nurses should remain current with developments in their field, share ideas and information, keep accurate and complete records, maintain integrity in all conduct and publications, and give due credit to the publications of others. Conflicts of interest and scientific misconduct, such as fabrication, falsification, slander, libel, and plagiarism are incompatible with and a violation of this Code.

DEDICATION TO COLLEAGUESForensic nurses, as employers, should promote and protect the legitimate interest of their employees, perform work honestly and competently, fulfill obligations, and safeguard proprietary information. As employees and managers, forensic nurses should treat subordinates with respect for their professionalism and concern for their well-being, and provide them with safe, congenial working environment, fair compensation, and proper acknowledgments of their scientific contributions. Forensic nurses should regard the tutelage of students as a trust conferred by society for the promotion of the student's learning and professional development. Each student should be treated respectfully and without exploitation. Forensic nurses should treat associates with respect, regardless of the level of their formal education, and encourage them, learn with and from them, share ideas honestly, and give credit for their contributions.

How are you going to prove that what Levicy did was with the countenance of Duke? It appears that she violated SANE protocols by giving her opinion--not on what the rape exam did or didn't show--but on other extraneous subjects like no ejaculation because rape is about power and that she embellished her statements to fit with evolving proseuction theories. If she failed to follow the guidelines how is Duke responsible, how can you even prove Duke Medical knew or should have known?

It's possible, since her supervisor attended some of the meetings where she evolved her story that a case could be made against Duke based on that, her supervisor's presence substantiates the view that Duke Medical was aware of what she was doing and condoned it, other than that, though, I can't see a legitimate cause of action. You aren't going to get away with making the rape exam the proximate cause of the arrests, the cause of the arrests was the hoaxer's lies and her false identifications.

Leave Massage Therapists out of it! There are flakes in our particular bowl of Wheaties (but most of us are crumbs?) - but most of us are decent, hard working people. And we also - mostly - abide by professional standards.

Levicy obviously doesn't even abide by standards that a Massage Student might be taught, especially with regard to documentation.

Please don't misunderstand my point on Levicy. I was not and am not trashing massage therapists, wilderness instructors, or anyone else in the different professions Levicy has practiced at some point in her life. I have enjoyed the fruits of labor from individuals in these fields, and I appreciate those talents and skills.

Levicy's past is significant in that this is a woman who was quite comfortable getting out in front of a group of people where she could demonstrate her "vast knowledge" of a given subject of her choosing.

Her earliest professional accomplishment seems to be that she was a white water rafting guide for 10 years. I am no expert, but I have been on several such guided trips, and I observed very much skill with this type of work. One has to be aware of the river and its nuances while speaking with complete strangers, pointing out different aspects of the journey, and watch out for their safety as well. Ms. Levicy no doubt is an engaging person with certain passions, strengths, and skills in her life.

Levicy participated in an event called "The Beautiful Project" (Bangor Daily News, Apr. 14, 2000) where she gave demonstrations on partner massage and spoke on the subject of osteoporosis and bone health. This looks to be like some sort of local event focused on feeling good about oneself, and learning about things to improve the quality of life. She spoke as a panel member at another Women's symposium sponsored by U Maine the following November.

By the summer of 2001, Levicy had graduated from Univ. of Maine and had a massage therapy practice in Bangor (Bangor Daily News, July 11, 2001). She was passionate for certain causes. At the writing of that article, she was hoping for to raise funds to enable her to partake on a bike ride for AIDS awareness. See maggief's post at http://z9.invisionfree.com/LieStoppers_Board/index.php?showtopic=3400&view=findpost&p=8862883

My point in bringing this up is to show that Ms. Levicy was a very confident woman from her early adulthood to the current time. She no doubt had certain skills and passion. Normally I would think these are great qualities. However, I think that from looking at Ms. Levicy's own particular past, we can see how she might be the kind of person who would be comfortable not only giving her opinion, but was also comfortable in the role of "expert". She had performed as an "expert" many times in the past.

When you add her "Vagina Monologues" experience, Women's Studies degree, fast-track to RN (where were those science courses?), SANE classes to the equation of her "expert" roles, you get a better picture of who she is. She is the epitome of someone who believes that she REALLY can do it all, and do it well. Until she met with Kingsbery, that is. Her come-uppance by him was no doubt a painful experience.

I have not read all preceding 100+ comments and may be repeating. Law suits against Nifong, DPD and Durham have to get over the immunity provided for public officers doing their duty. It can be hurdled if their is egregious conduct, section 1983 of the civil rights act (designed to go after southern shieriffs firehosing demonstrators) is also a help. BUT Ms. Levicy has no such immunity and has put Duke at great jeopardy.

The reason for focusing some posts on the actions of nurse Levicy is because it is an integral part of the story. You can't understand what happened without looking at how a very dubious accusation from an accuser with minimal credibility got blown into a nation wide witch hunt.

Certainly, the entire narrative includes the faculty, the pot bangers, Brodhead, Nifong, MSM and national pundits. But it is not only CGM's lies they were willing to swallow but also nurse Tara's ideologically driven descriptions.

A fear of offending blacks led them to be afraid to publicly doubt the accuser's stories. Similarly, a fear of offending women led them to publicly repeat Livicy's endorsement of Chrystal's lies. Livicy's statements don't souond like the descriptions of a forensic anything. It is not the language of a scientist investigating observed data. It is the rhetoric of a feminist ideologue and if you are a university faculty member, a Duke administrator or apparently a Durham prosecutor, you are trained to defer to any statement encoded by feminist rhetoric.

That is a big part of the story. Kudos to KC for not running away from it.

Durham in Wonderland is not a witch hunt. It is a truth hunt. No honest accounting of this case could overlook the role of SANE nurse in training Levicy.

Tara's supervisor is also a "massage therapist". LS has an entire take on what a fruit she is. Lives in Chapel Hill, need I say more, ha ha.

Chicago, I too don't remember a Pic of Tara on the LS Board, but we are searching now for one. One is now posted, but we are not sure it's "Tara". If anyone over here knows what she looks like, how about going over to Lie stoppers Board and confirm the pic listed as her or not her.

A New Jersey Lawyer writes that part of Ms. Levicy's problem may be that her training was inadequate. As I understand her background, she got her bachelors degree in nursing through Dukes accelerated BSN program. The program allows holders of a bachelors degree not in nursing to complete a bachelors degree in nursing in 15 months, with 15 credits that can be applied to the masters degree program. There are certain prerequisites to the program, although they appear to be fairly light on science (no chemistry or math (outside of statistics) for a health care profession. Two prerequisites (sociology and statistics) are interesting, suggesting the accelerated program is designed more to funnel students into Duke's masters and doctoral program than to train practicing nurses. The description of the program on Duke's website, moreover, makes it sound very attractive to nurse-social activist like Ms. Levicy. In short, the 15-month program was not enough to transform women's studies major Levicy into a nurse and may have only supported, if not added to, an ideological bias. It's too bad that schools like Duke don't take a page from the book of prestigious schools like Penn, Emory, Boston College, Georgetown and Villanova that have four year undergraduate nursing programs. My guess is that, like athletics, much of Duke's administration is uncomfortable with the thought of students (male or female) getting their hands dirty in learning how to compently care for other people.

Anon 9:59 (Another outraged SANE)should be outraged. The International Association of Forensic Nurses granted Levicy full SANE certification even after she obviously violated their code of ethics which you posted. As such, they did not act with integrity in their certification process. If they don't hold their members and applicants to their standards, then their certification is of no professional value.

It's hard here to differentiate from realistic assessments about lawsuits and people voicing their wishes. For example, Mike Pressler got totally screwed. Many have said he 'for sure' could sue Duke, but it seems highly unlikely that Duke's lawyers wouldn't have found enough legal cause to dismiss him, so while it woudl be fantastic for Pressler to get a few million from Duke, it is very very unlikely. So, when people post how a lawsuit against DUMC is a slam dunk, they aren't particularly credible, having already feverently believed that Pressler would sue and win, that the 3 boys would sue Duke and win...

It seems to me the only possible cause of action the three boys would have against Duke medical would be some kind of obstruction charge, which is tenuous at best. I don't believe her mistakes, even her changing her story would rise to the level of an actual "lie" since it was her opinion, which however biased and wrong, she is entitlted to give.

Duke parent 2004 5:35 said... ...Amac's 1:08 A. M. post is one of the best I've read in months.

...Quoting a friend ...a University does not possess the ability, nor certainly the authority, to conduct independent investigations of matters that are under criminal indictment. ... Bad things "happen" to organizations all the time. What distinguishes one outfit from another is how it responds to the wheel of fortune. ::It will be interesting to see if your 'Wheel of Fortune' argument is going to work...for a university with a $4.5 Billion endowment. Don't you pretty much make your own Wheel of Fortune when you actually possess a fortune?I think that is called having sufficient resources to prevent problems.

But rather than argue with the Wheel of Future argument let me make a suggestion. There are only two (2) groups on campus that are 'way to the left of center'. Group # 1 oppose racism and Group # 2 oppose sexism. You don't even have Group # 3 which are the wild people who are environmentalists. Count your blessings.

Why not distinguish yourself as a university by helping to create a first class model program for African America young people in Durham who are at risk for HIV, HPV, Unwanted Pregnancy and Diabetes?

Your left of center faculty; their students and the SANE nurses could put together a program for young people that would distinguish the university for the next 100 years... and you could make the program part of DukeEngage!

The Durham Health Department is sitting out there ...ALL ALONE...trying to do just that.

Tier # 1 Universities makes their own Wheel of Fortune, I would think. ::GP

OK, Cedarford and Hamilton have convinced me in their posts to the last Levicy essay to change my view on Levicy's duty to the defendants. But that duty arises out of her misrepresentations to DPD rather than any medical/nursing procedures. That someone might be falsely accused as a result of her reports to DPD was certainly foreseeable.

It's not a medical malpractice claim, though, since that does require a health care provider/patient relationship, at least in my state (not NC).

Of course, part of what a SANE is doing is not a medical procedure at all, it is a forensic procedure. That part of the SANE activity is specifically directed at third parties, identity as yet unknown. There could be negligence in that procedure which could lead to false positives, I suppose. Say for example, the SANE mixes up the swabs from the genital area with something from the accuser's arm, where innocent contact might have taken place between accuser and accused.

Liestoppers is reporting that Dean Sue is an attorney which we already know however Dean Sue has an earned MHA degree which is ...Masters Degree in Hospital Administration.Is that the connection between main campus and the Duke Hospital?

This is off topic, but I would like to know what others make of one line on p. 7 of the (NC AG) Roy Cooper (Summary of Conclusions) Report where it describes the False Accuser on videotape stumbling around drunk and high on painkillers and anti-psychotics, slurring her words and incoherently blurting at no one in particular, "I'm a Cop!!!" (exclamation points added).

I simply can not get this image out of my head. To me, it encapsulates what this case is really about - a woman who likes to party and often gets so 'out of her gourd' that she becomes incoherent and often has to lie and/or make up stories/excuses as to her behavior or whereabouts. Couple that with her medical history and criminal record, and you have a very potent mix. Obviously, this was well known to the DPD, Fonger and anyone else in town who has had dealings with her.

While I guess I can understand AG Cooper's decision not to prosecute her, I can't understand why more people aren't talking about her behaviors openly, and, more importantly, how very well known they were to most people in town.

My guess is because it doesn't surprise anyone who really followed the case. The fact that the judge gave the defense her medical records is very unusual in a rape case, the facts had to be extremely compelling in terms of mental instability and liklihood of hallucinations, falsehoods, etc. There were also the reports from the strip club of her acting the same way--getting loaded, staggering around, then passing out or faking passing out to get out of trouble. No surprise there either.

I suspect the defense held back the existance of this videotape from Nifong, planning to spring it on him sometime shortly before trial, to give him less time to arrest the videotaper on a bogus charge or 'lose' the original tape.

I wasn't surprised at all to have it validated she was taking methadone, I had long thought she was a drug addict of some kind and that her behavior at the party was probably due to her getting high in the bathroom, going from slightly loopy to raging incoherence.

That's why I don't get how anyone can be so sure of a lawsuit, let alone a successful lawsuit against Levicy or DUMC.

"Experts" testify in trials all the time, usually the defense and prosecution 'experts' will have diametrically opposed views, confession was/was not false; injuries were/were not consistent with victim testimony, autopsy does/does not track with prosecution/defense time of death. A lot of these 'experts' are totally biased, some of them have never seen anything BUT a false confession, others never found a defendant mentally unfit.

Being stupid, wrong and even unprofessional doesn't necessarily open one up to civil liability. I don't see it. Kethra lost credibility by claiming FRAUD because of who signed the rape exam form where. There are many more worse examples of mistakes that don't rise to the level of liability.

Not being credible isn't the same as being legally liable. I think Levicy changed her story about 'no condoms' to help the prosecutor, but how would you ever prove it, let alone prove she did it with malicious intent?

10:10 - You wish. There is nothing more to write. Everyone has made their point a few times over. As for me, I am neither a friend or family to this nurse. I am an Rn who knows the event was the collecting of material and thaat was done correctly. The rest is from the noise machine.

Any one who took part in the conspiracy needs to pay the consequences, regardless if they are the "poor nurse".I am also an RN and disgraced at her actions.(the one poster made me jealous... I had to take chem, organic chem, physics, A&P, micro, statisics, just to mention a few classes)IMO, Levicy is a result of the nursing shortage- lowing standards

Tara's phone number and email have been removed from the website. Hmmm.

Is she no longer be in the employment of DUMC? Is it verifiable that she has in fact received her certification as a SANE? Was her connection with DUMC terminated at the end of that certification process?

It is interesting and sad to note that Gonzales ordered FBI to conduct civil right violation investigation immediately after the police clashed with illegal immigrants in LA on May 1.It is now absolute evident, that Gonzales or DOJ will not intervenehere since the victims or alleged victims are not illegals.Gonzales could not care less what happen to couple of "rich white boys". He is more than happy to railroad and frame border agents, as well.

I'm not a fan of 'outing' people's information on the Internet especially when they are not public figures.

Wendy Murphy is one thing, she makes most of her living on TV. A North Carolina nurse who never made a public statement is quite another matter. What is the point of putting her picture up or her email? Revenge and intimidation, no other reason.

Given what I've read on this blog I can imagine the kinds of emails she's gotten, calling her a criminal and who knows what else. It is this behavior that diminishes the great work done by the blogs on this case.

The word "opinion" is getting muddied up. Anyone is entitled to a political type opinion and as such it means little. A professional opinion given by an expert in a court of law is subject to cross examination and opposing experts and normally, becasue given in court, the opiner is protected. But not always. At least one whore doctor who regularly opined in asbestos and similar cases has lost his license and may go to jail. Ms. Levicy allegedly 1) reported stuff that didn't happen, 2)negligently recorded information wrong and 3)gave opinions which were negligently given. All three could have contributed to a wild prosecution that causerd enormous financial damage and irreparable harm to the reputation of the accused. Unless the state has passed legislation to protect her and Duke as part of the criminal justice system, I do not see why she and Dke are not open to liability? Any alwyers, please enlighten us.

I would say that the re-posting of Tara's picture is a public service. If you find yourself at DUMC, you will know to avoid being treated by this woman, unless you have a Hoax that needs propping up by some agenda driven nurse!

Hark! Could that pressing reason to do so be provoked by a new desire to concoct yet another flimsy scenario as you defend the horrific behavior of one SANE nut named Tara Levicy?

Actually, her behavior, while wrong and unprofessional, was not horrific.

Horrific is a nurse killing babies with Trisomy-21 (Down's syndrome) because she thinks the parents should be spared the pain. Horrific is what happens to dissidents in North Korea, or what happened to them in Cambodia.

12:56 You are so right and we need to keep our prioritys in check. With all the tragedy I have seen over the years in the ED, it is had for me to work up a steam over writing your name in the wrong spot. Dumb but not horrific.

NO! Whether or not Levicy suffers legal consequences she should not be a SANE nurse. What happens next time an alleged rape occurs??

(A) If the rape was real, the real victim will be hampered by any testimony from Levicy -- her testimony will be immediately suspect.

(B) If the rape fake, we have a person of questionable competence and likely bias who may once again help legally attack and innocent person. That innocent person has good statistical odds of being a black man AND/OR has good statistical odds of not having as much money to defend himself.

Nip it in the bud. She should be disqualified at the very least from serving as a SANE nurse. These weren't "beginner" mistakes. This was a wholesale year long screw up, perhaps criminally so.

On that I agree, Levicy would be a liability to any real rape victim. The AG's statements about her conclusions being subjective and not based on any of the medical findings would and will haunt her in any future rape cases she is involved in.

She would do better to give up her nursing career and work as a rape counselor.

If Levicy gets on the stand in a future case and says 'blunt force trauma consistent with sexual assault' what jury is going to take her seriously after the defense reads them what Cooper said about her? What jury is going to look at her as anything other than totally biased and discount any opinion she has about rape, rape injury or rape victims??

K.C., can you please correct this post? Levicy is a graduate of the University of SOUTHERN Maine, not University of Maine. There's a big difference between the schools - especially in terms of admission standards....

Kilgore said...Here's a link to Stephen Baskervilles latest article on the importance of feminism in the Duke Lacrosse situation. Baskerville argues convincingly that feminism and women's studies are a serious problem far beyond Levicy and Nifong.

You are being too narrow here. I think you'll find identical problems in any academic entity that ends it's title with the word "studies". The problem is they often include a component of academically unproductive "Professors" who profess to nothing but political activism.

Finally, am I just being snobbish, or as with nurse Tara, that I consider anyone un or under educated who doesn't have a basic scientific literacy. Knowing that every one of our cells contains DNA that can be found by tests. I don't mean the details, but the very broad details of how organisms work, basic astronomy, very basic physics, very basic physiology. Tara doesn't seem to know about trama or even bruising at all -- very scary in a nurse. You better have some advocate watching you when you enter a hospital.

wegl wegl @11:57 said...Tara's phone number and email have been removed from the website. Hmmm.

Hmmm, indeed. KC reports that her number and e'mail address only after a polite inquiry from him. What have all the hate-mailing, death-threating blog hooligans been doing if not hate-mailing and death-threating Levicy? I mean, if they were doing it to the 88-of-Hate, as has been recently claimed, why weren't they doing it to Levicy? Hmmmm. Maybe they weren't doing it to Levicy or the 88-of-Hate and the 88oH are just lying again?

Anonymous (R.R. Hamilton) 3:20 said... "Hmmm, indeed. KC reports that her number and e'mail address only after a polite inquiry from him. What have all the hate-mailing, death-threating blog hooligans been doing if not hate-mailing and death-threating Levicy? I mean, if they were doing it to the 88-of-Hate, as has been recently claimed, why weren't they doing it to Levicy? Hmmmm. Maybe they weren't doing it to Levicy or the 88-of-Hate and the 88oH are just lying again? Nooooo, couldn't be."

If anyone is receiving ANY life threatening or hate filled emails they should report them immediately to the appropriate legal authorities. E-mails CAN be traced. Emails like that SHOULD be traced and the authors prosecuted. It is reprehensible to send anything of the sort. It is reprehensible to claim that such things ARE being sent en mass if they are not. These are serious matters that are being alleged. Have the authorities been called?

Oh please, didn't you read the article about the woman blogger who had people go on her blog and say they wanted to rape her, then posted photos of her with her mouth duct taped?? Nothing happened to the poster.

Calling the authorities about email threats unless they are very specific or repeated, stalker like, is pretty pointless. Isn't there enough legitimate amunition to bash Levicy with without resorting to nonsense like "the authors should be prosecuted" For what? Hate speech is protected in almost all case.

Simply put: without Levicy there is no Nifong-ing. Of course, she's an issue!

Levicy's statements, especially those post 3/14, combined with the apparent support of her supervisor will result in DUMC getting hit with the largest civil lawsuit among Nifong, city of Durham, DNA Security, etc. And, I should say, it's deserved.

Tara is entitled to her opinion about women not lying about rape, albeit inaccurate. However, given the enormous media attention that the hoax has garnered, she no doubt would have heard about the photographic evidence as well that at least exonerates Reade. So I'm wondering, did she ever, at any time, at any point during the investigation, did she ever, even once, stop and tell KNIFong that maybe he's prosecuting the wrong people? It doesn't look like she did. She can be steadfast in her belief that she hasn't met a woman who's lied about rape, but it doesn't mean that the right people are being pursued. She's not interested in truth and justice at all. Sad, truly sad.

[Missing added. The alleged victim, Hans Reiser's ex-wife, is nowhere to be found, and the prosecution has not actually produced any evidence that a murder has been committed. There have also been rumours that the ex-wife fled back to Russia. Also, his two children from the marriage are now missing as well.]

Anonymous May 4 2:25 PM asked:"How could she be a liability to a real rape victim? She is on their side and an advocate."

Her testimony in any future rape case will be in question by the defense since they will trot out the Duke rape case. They will tear her apart on the stand and thereby increase the likelyhood that a rapist is acquited.

Anonymous 4:30:00 PM said... "Calling the authorities about email threats unless they are very specific or repeated, stalker like, is pretty pointless. Isn't there enough legitimate amunition to bash Levicy with without resorting to nonsense like "the authors should be prosecuted" For what? Hate speech is protected in almost all case."

Guess my sarcasm didn't come through. I'm not totally convinced there really are any e-mail death threats or that there is anything genuinely hateful enough to have pulled her email and phone.

I wasn't going to respond again until my wife submits but I have a good reason :)

First, I have contacted AMac directly and my wife is not anonymous to her. I believe AMac is comfortable in the fact that she is indeed a SANE nurse. They will talk on the phone before submitting and my wife will provide any other verification that is needed.

The reason I am writing now is that early next week, my wife and I are going to sit down with her mentor and several of her colleagues to go over the case and to go over my wife's essay. So I thought I would offer - if anyone has any questions they would like us to ask them please let me know and we will ask them as written and I will give you as close to verbatim feedback as possible. We are simply after the truth. We will freely provide any feedback from this meeting that undermines our case and my wife will include any dissent in her essay. This is not "us versus them".

"For Mrs. DK's rebuttal of KC Johnson to be effective, it must be a comparison and contrast of the information KC has already revealed, with additional information ABOUT LEVICY or THIS CASE that negates KC's information.

Any other form, i.e. a long diatribe on what the SANE procedures are (which we can all look up and have in many cases...they are at LS), then a compendium on how Levicy did not "really" or "knowingly" or "intentionally" violate any rules, laws or procedures, is worthless. To be of any interest, there must be demonstrated knowledge of this case and the facts of it."

This is partly true, although I understand 100% what you are saying. Please note, Mr. Johnson is the one leveling the charges and thus the burden is on him to substantiate them. My wife will point out where he fails to do so. One thing will be made very clear - Mr. Johnson makes gross errors in his understanding of SANE nursing. These errors fundamentally destroy his case.

One last note - neither my wife nor I are defenders of Levicy. We are not close enough to the case to do so. My wife's essay is merely to counter Mr. Johnson's attack.

DK - I would like to know what if any relationship exists between SANE nursing and feminism. How do the two intersect? Is there ideological material that is taught about rape similar to what we have heard from Levicy? At the SANE conferences is the feminist viewpoint present? Is it the dominant viewpoint? Is it one of many? What is the assumed reason for rape? Power and control? Is that a part of the SANE way of seeing things or is data collection their only concern?

K.C., can you please correct this post? Levicy is a graduate of the University of SOUTHERN Maine, not University of Maine. There's a big difference between the schools - especially in terms of admission standards....

From what I'm understanding, Levicy is a graduate of both schools. She received her bachelor's degree in Women's Studies in 2001 from Univ. of Maine and then later did the fast track program at Univ. of Southern Maine to get her nursing degree.

To DK It looks to me like you have your work cut out for you. As things stand now, the SANE program at DUMC appears to be focused on supporting the womans accusations and pushing for the mans conviction regardless of anything else. In a better world, such programs would be focused on doing the best possible job of finding and documenting relevant evidence of what happened prior to the ED visit - along with compassionate, supportive care of the patient. Do you see why the DUMC version of SANE nursing can never be allowed to interact with the criminal justice system? DAs are forbidden to take a purely adversarial approach to evidence gathering and analysis. If Nifong is going down for doing this, why shouldn't DUMC?

This is the readers digest version, installment #3, of Dr. Johnson's Hat Trick. All of the Levicy statements from the suspect DPD, defendant Nifong, or statements without a clear source have been taken out. You decide.

1.) In her report from the night of the “attack,” Levicy wrote that Mangum said no condoms were used.

In follow-up questioning from defense attorney Doug Kingsbery, Levicy claimed that she didn’t tell Wilson a new story. Her March 14 report, she said, had indicated that Mangum wasn’t sure whether condoms were used.

Presented with a hard copy of the report showing that Mangum was uncertain about ejaculation, not condom use, Levicy now asserted that Mangum had “hesitated” when asked about condom use—

When it was pointed out to her that testing could reveal DNA from even a single cell Levicy confessed to being “surprised.”

(Joe Neff has reported that Levicy wrote back to the DA’s investigator a few days after her meeting—Nifong, to offer additional reasons why no semen was found, including the possibility that no attack occurred.)

she told defense attorneys, she had deliberately avoided any press coverage about the case. At another point in the interview, however, she commented that Dan Flannery had made the call to hire the strippers. Kingsbery then asked her how she knew Flannery’s name, since he gave the name Dan Flannigan to the stripper agency. That must have come from having read newspaper articles about the case, Levicy replied.

she, along with Theresa Arico, declined two requests for comment about this post and a third offer to post their entire reply, unedited.

---------

According to the Duke website as of Monday, Tara Levicy remains in the employ of Duke University Medical Center, as a fully certified SANE nurse.

DK - I for one am anxious to read her report. I am one, among nurses who has written from the beginning this is much ado about nothing. KC is not in this alone. As is his right, he has supported others who condemed this nurse. I just want justice for all.

Oh, so AMac is a woman. Didn't know that.All is beginning to make much more sense.There's a whole load of sisterhood bitches here trying to discredit KC.Sorry, tuchis queens. KC is RIGHT ON. Levicy is going down!

“Gun control: The theory that a woman found dead in an alley, raped and strangled with her panty hose, is somehow morally superior to a woman explaining to police how her attacker got that fatal bullet wound.”

Patients are usually referred to by their disease process, not their name. ie - the heart attack, the rape. the laceration, etc. Rarely do we know or remember their names -On the floor, it is the room number - "whats going on with 123?"

Blog Awards

About Me

I am from Higgins Beach, in Scarborough, Maine, six miles south of Portland. After spending five years as track announcer at Scarborough Downs, I left to study fulltime in graduate school, where my advisor was Akira Iriye. I have a B.A. and Ph.D. from Harvard, and an M.A. from the University of Chicago. At Brooklyn College and the CUNY Graduate Center, I teach classes in 20th century US political, constitutional, and diplomatic history; in 2007-8, I was Fulbright Distinguished Chair for the Humanities at Tel Aviv University.

Book

Comments Policy

(1) Comments are moderated, but with the lightest of touches, to exclude only off-topic comments or obviously racist or similar remarks.

(2) My clearing a comment implies neither that I agree nor that I disagree with the comment. My opinion is expressed in my words and my words only. Since this blog has more than 1500 posts, and since I at least occasionally comment myself, the blog provides more than enough material for readers to discern my opinions.

(3) If a reader finds an offensive comment, I urge the reader to e-mail me; if the comment is offensive, I will gladly delete it.

(4) Commenters who either misrepresent their identity or who engage in obvious troll behavior will not have their comments cleared. Troll-like behavior includes, but is not limited to: repeatedly linking to off-topic sites; repeatedly asking questions that already have been answered; offering unsubstantiated remarks whose sole purpose appears to be inflaming other commenters.

"From the Scottsboro Boys to Clarence Gideon, some of the most memorable legal narratives have been tales of the wrongly accused. Now “Until Proven Innocent,” a new book about the false allegations of rape against three Duke lacrosse players, can join these galvanizing cautionary tales . . , Taylor and Johnson have made a gripping contribution to the literature of the wrongly accused. They remind us of the importance of constitutional checks on prosecutorial abuse. And they emphasize the lesson that Duke callously advised its own students to ignore: if you’re unjustly suspected of any crime, immediately call the best lawyer you can afford."--Jeffrey Rosen, New York Times Book Review